Israel planning a possible nuclear attack on Iran.

Because you exaggerated it to say "destruction of a civilization". I was telling you the facts. I didn't say it is ok or not to attack Israel.

 

What are you talking about? On what information are you basing this? Iran is the one still sending in aid to the Palestinians. If they cared more about destroying Israel they wouldn't have offered to cut off funding for Hamas, and Hezbollah.

I would say they care about their own security and future, those that can help them, and then somewhere down their list, their animosity with Israel.

That is based on their spending priorities, diplomacy etc.

I'm not sure where you get the idea that their priorities are first and foremost to destroy Israel.

 

Right - so since there's Chinese in America, then if we destroyed China, that's not destroying a civilization?????

Give me a break.

 

Please, Iran gives to the Palestines to fight Israel. Do you think Iran would care about Palestinians if there was no Israel?

What about thier own poor? What about the heaps of Muslims in Ethopia that are suffering? Or even in Iraq?

I can't believe you actually think that Iran's gov't gives one iota of care about the Palestians beyond their real target of destroying Israel.

 

Well, the majority of Jews are outside of Israel. But the majority of Chinese are in China. Don't you see the difference?

 

Of course not. If not for Israel, we don't have this Palestinian problem.

What about the other Arab countries? They pumped even more $$$ to Hamas. I suppose they also want to destroy Israel then. But I suppose Israel should take care of them first before Iran because they actually invaded Israel which Iran never.

 

Everything is driven by interest. No matter that interest is based on political view, religious belief, economical benefit, or pure hatrad without reason (which doesn't exist in real world), it won't make any starting of interest-driven war "righter".

If one country could and would actually start a nuclear war on another country, based on the potential of 0.01% that second country could help your enemy, or based on the belief of yours that it is a rouge country who hates you, we would have been back to stone age long long time ago.

It's funny how a country without nuclear weapons will be considered by military powers super threat of WMD, but all countries with nuclear weapons are "responsible" members overnight.

I am sure if one kills everyone around him, he will NOT be threatened by anyone else any more. However, no one can be sure to go out there and kill everyone without worrying about being destroyed. Until that day, we are still safe.

 

Some of y'all are taking Ahmedinajad way too seriously. Ahmedinajad is a blow hard looking to build up his reputation. How much power he has though is highly suspect. While he might say he wants to see Israel wiped off the map he more than likely doesn't have the power to make it so. The Ayatollah's wield ultimate power in Iran and while they are backward they haven't shown to be suicidal.

The analysis of Iran looking to develop a deterrent power rather than an offensive nuclear power seems the most likely. Iran is looking for prestige and also a way to counter Israeli and US superiority since they know that Israel considers them their major threat and they know that our president has also put Iran onto the Axis of Evil and is at the front and back door of Iran. The best way to provide a military deterrent is nukes.

As for the argument that Iran could wipe out Israel in a first strike, first off even if they develop a nuke they don't have good delivery systems. Iranian planes will be shot down and their missiles might accidently hit Jordan or Lebanon as much as Tel Aviv and Haifa. Giving the nukes to another group like Hamas and Hezbollah is dangerous too of the high possibility of it being traced back to Iran and also the possibility they might use the nuke on a target that Iran would prefer them not to. Letting some third party use a nuke is a massive gamble since you don't want something like that out of your control. Secondly I find it hard to believe that anyone considering themselves a Muslim would risk wiping out Jerusalem and to wipe out Israel they need wipe out Jerusalem. Finally even if Iran could wipe out Israel in a first strike the US will certainly wipe out Iran and its doubtful that Russia, or the PRC will be willing to risk nuclear response on behalf of Iran, especially if Iran launced nukes first.

I agree nukes in Iran's hands aren't good but I think the Israeli doomsday scenario is far fetched. Ahmedinajad's rhetoric is like Kruschev's rhetoric of "We will bury you!" its hot air.

In regard to an Israeli nuke strike on Iran's facilities that causes a ton of problems for Israel but causes a ton of problems for us too. It is not in the US interest for Israel to go off and launch strike as the one's who will bear the most brunt of the response will be US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

Yeah. Some people really need to brush up what they know about Iran. The Iranian President has zero power over the armed force. Unlike Bush, there isn't much he can do to make Israel disappear from the pages of history. But then, Bush also believes Ahmedinajad controls the Qud force. No wonder we are in such a mess.

 

I think there is a big difference between politicians "believing" the power of Ahmedinajad and online posters believing that. Politicians have all the data, but they choose the ones fitting their agenda, and show their calculated and interest-driven "belief" in the public. Even though Bush may not be knowledgable enough of any international affairs, I am sure his people know how realistic that "wiping Isreal off the map" rant is, but whether they decide to use that to start a war, is their judgement call based on their own interest.

 

Neither Ahmadinejad's statements about Israel nor Israel's supposed plans to pre-emptively attack Iran are to be taken too seriously.

There is no way that Iran could launch any attack on Israel unprovoked without guaranteed massive retaliation. Even if Iran managed to destroy Israel first (highly doubtful they have that capability), they obviously could not manage to destroy U.S. ability to retaliate. To imagine that Iran would comtemplate such an attack in order to invite massive retaliation is beyond ridiculous.

But Israel also isn't stupid. Unless there was credible imminent threat of an Iranian attack, simply attacking pre-emptively to weaken Iranian military capabilities won't be enough justification in the eyes of the world community. And if tactical nukes are used, it will be much worse still. Iran will retaliate and things could easily spiral out of control into a full fledged major war which would benefit no one. And if Iran was attacked first, it wil surely have much greater world support and Israel much less. But again I'm sure that Israel is not that stupid to launch such an attack unless they felt that the high risk of a full fledged war in which a large part of the world might side with Iran was worth it which present circumstances clearly they are not.

It's pretty clear that these statements are mostly posturing and a lot of hot air.